Replies

Thanks for the rant. It demonstrates the difficulty of any balance.

Arnold Schwarzeneggar flunks the test.

I find the choice in CA to be intriguing. Vote for a bad guy who is a baby killer. Vote for OUR "star" who is a baby killer. Or vote for OUR loser who is a baby saver and theonomically sound in other areas.

Conservatives are told to ignore McClintock in favor of Arnold. Many of them are going that route. To date, I've not heard a single conservative principle espoused by Arnie.

Thanks for the rant. It demonstrates the difficulty of any balance. Arnold Schwarzeneggar flunks the test. I find the choice in CA to be intriguing. Vote for a bad guy who is a baby killer. Vote for OUR "star" who is a baby killer. Or vote for OUR loser who is a baby saver and theonomically sound in other areas. Conservatives are told to ignore McClintock in favor of Arnold. Many of them are going that route. To date, I've not heard a single conservative principle espoused by Arnie.

Well, that's because Arnold does not espouse any Conservative principles. (shrugs and grins -- seems obvious to me).

Arnold espouses Center-Left principles (weighted towards the center economically, and towards the left socially) -- as opposed to Bustamante, who espouses Hard-Left principles.

Now, as I do not live in California, I am relatively uninterested in the California Recall Election -- except to the extent it sucks away media attention from the Democratic candidates for President, which is arguably a good thing. However, I don't really consider the choice in California to be all that difficult -- to me, it's simply a question of What You Want to accomplish with your vote.

IF you want a Republican Party Governor, you vote Schwarzeneggar.
- 30% GOP Votes + 20% Arnold Swing Votes = GOP Victory
- 30% GOP Votes + 0% McClintock Swing Votes = GOP Loss
On the other hand, IF you want to "Make a Principled Statement" with your vote, and you are comfortable losing, then you vote McClintock. Or do you?? I wouldn't. I decided a long time ago that the odds of my single vote influencing the outcome of a major Election was less than the odds of being struck by lightning on the way to the voting booth, and so I always vote for the candidate who most closely reflects my Principles -- simply to increase their Vote Totals, thereby making my one-vote "Statement of Principles". And, being perfectly confortable with voting for a losing candidate, I would vote for CONSTITUTION PARTY candidate Diane Templin (as there are no pro-life libertarians on the Ballot of whom I am aware).
- I mean, if you are going to Lose anyway, why not Lose with Gusto? Why cast a Losing vote for 85-90% of your Principles, when you could cast a Losing vote for 100% of your Principles? What's the point of Losing for the sake of "Making a Principled Statement", if you only make an 85-90% Principled Statement? Why not make a 100% Principled Statement?
- See, I understand Voting to "Make a Statement" -- it's how I vote. What I can't understand is, if McClintock Voters have resigned themselves to losing anyway, what grounds would cause them to prefer GOP McClintock over Constitution-Party Diane Templin? If McClintock Voters have decided to be "Principled Purists", why not be a 100% Constitution-Party Purist rather than a 90% McClintock Purist?

I can understand voters like BibChr who hold their nose and vote GOP. It's not me (except when the GOP guy really is the best on the slate, which did actually happen fairly often when I lived in rural Virginia), but I can understand it on tactical, pragmatic grounds.

What I don't understand is, if one is perfectly comfortable with the GOP losing anyway... why vote McClintock? Why not just go all the way and vote Constitution??

Honest question, not baiting at all.

Conservatives in California are being told to lie down and prostrate themselves before Arnold and Maria.

It is nauseating the way that the mainstream RINO establishment is marginalizing Tom McClintock, who is stalwart and salted on all the right issues.

California conservatives are being shouted at, intimidated, ridiculed and told to "sit down and shut up" even though McClintock holds the high-moral ground.

All in the name of "Pragmatism", that specific Americanist idol.